Energetic balance of two farming tools in a Fluvisol for the cultivation of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas Lam)
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research work was carried out at the agricultural and livestock farm “Ranulfo Leyva Pacheco” which belongs to the enterprise of multiple cultivations “Paquito Rosales Benítez”. The soil preparation process for the cultivation of sweet potato not only changes soil physical properties but also leads to high energy consumption, especially in the labor of soil tillage with disk plow, where a great percentage of fuel is consumed. The objective of this work has been to evaluate an alternative farming implement of vertical and horizontal cut to the traditional with disk plow in soil ploughing, which allows reducing energy consumption of the process under the conditions of a Fluvisol and also Carbon Dioxide emissions that reach the atmosphere. The treatments considered have been traditional soil ploughing, T1, which consisted in ploughing the soil with the ADI-3M disk plow, and soil ploughing, T2, which consisted in ploughing the soil with a multi-plowing machine. Treatment T2 presented less direct use energy consumption (0,83 GJ ha-1) and indirect use energy consumption (0,08 GJ ha-1), with a total consumption of 0,91 GJ ha-1, causing the 66% reduction of CO2 emissions, motivated by a 69% reduction of fuel consumption (20,2 L ha-1) regarding the ploughing with disk plow with 29,2 L ha-1 under the same soil and climatic conditions.
Article Details
Those authors that have publications with this journal accept the following terms:
1. They will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) that allows third parties to share the work whenever its author is indicated and its first publication this journal. Under this license the author will be free of:
• Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
• The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
• Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
• NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
• No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
2. The authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements to distribute the published version of the work (e.g., deposit it in an institutional telematics file or publish it in a monographic volume) whenever the initial publication is indicated in this journal.
3. The authors are allowed and recommended disseminating their work through the Internet (e.g. in institutional telematics archives or on their website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase the citations of the published work. (See the Effect of open access).
References
ÁLVAREZ, R.L., P. PANEQUE, O. ÁLVAREZ Y M. BRIZUELA: Costo Energético de las operaciones de siembra más comunes en Cuba, Ed. IIMA, MINAG, La Habana, Cuba, 2006.
ASAE STANDARD: Estimating agricultural field machinery costs, By: Shuler, R.T., Extension Agricultural Engineer, USA, 2006.
BAILEY, A.P., W.D. BASFORD, N. PENLINGTON, J.R. PARK, D.H. KEATINGE, T. REHMAN, R.B. TRANTER, & C.M. YATES: “A comparison of energy use in conventional and integrated arable farming systems in the UK”, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 97: 241-253, 2003.
BOWERS, W.: Agricultural field equipment, 6: 117-129, In: Fluck, R.C. (Ed.), Energy in World Agriculture, Energy in Farm Production, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1992.
CHAMSING, A., V, SALOKHE, & G. SINGH: Energy Consumption for Selected Crops in Different Regions of Thailand, Agricultural Systems and Engineering, School of Enviroment, Resources and Development Asian Institute of Technology, Doon University, India. 2006.
HACISEFEROGULLARI, H., M. ACAROGLU & I. GEZER: “Determination of the energy balance of the sugar beet plant”, Energy Sources 25(1), 15-22, 2003.
HETZ, E. y A. BARRIOS: “Costo energético de las operaciones agrícolas mecanizadas más comunes en chile”, Agro sur, 25(2): 1997.
MANDAL, K.G., K.P. SAHA,.P.K. GHOSH, K.M. HATI & K.K. BANDYOPADHYAY: “Bioenergy and economic analysis of soybean-
based crop production systems in central India”, Biomass and Bioenergy, 23: 337-345, 2002.
OLIVET. Y.E.: Efecto de tres sistemas de labranza en las propiedades físicas y en el consumo energético para el cultivo del tabaco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) en un Vertisol, Tesis (en opción al grado científico de Doctor en Ingeniería Rural), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Madrid, España, 2010.
PANEQUE, P. y D. SOTO: “Costo energético de las labores de preparación de suelos en Cuba”, Revista Ciencias Técnicas Agropecuarias,
(4): 17-21, 2007.
PANEQUE, R. P. y Y. PRADO: “Comparación de tres sistemas agrícolas en el cultivo del fríjol”, Revista Ciencias Técnicas Agropecua- rias, 14(3): 42-48, 2005.
PARRA, S. L.R.: Influencia de cuatro sistemas de laboreo en las propiedades físicas de un Fluvisol y en el balance energético en cultivos de raíces y tubérculos, 178pp Tesis (en opción al grado científico de Doctor en Ingeniería Rural), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid,Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Madrid, España, 2009.